IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bon/boncrc/crctr224_2024_563.html

The Preference Lattice

Author

Listed:
  • Gregorio Curello
  • Ludvig Sinander

Abstract

Most comparisons of preferences are instances of single-crossing dominance. We examine the lattice structure of single-crossing dominance, proving characterisation, existence and uniqueness results for minimum upper bounds of arbitrary sets of preferences. We apply these theorems to derive new comparative statics theorems for collective choice and under analyst uncertainty, to characterise a general 'maxmin' class of uncertainty-averse preferences over Savage acts, and to revisit the tension between liberalism and Pareto efficiency in social choice.

Suggested Citation

  • Gregorio Curello & Ludvig Sinander, 2024. "The Preference Lattice," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2024_563, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:bon:boncrc:crctr224_2024_563
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.crctr224.de/research/discussion-papers/archive/dp563
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yaari, Menahem E., 1969. "Some remarks on measures of risk aversion and on their uses," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 315-329, October.
    2. Simone Cerreia‐Vioglio & David Dillenberger & Pietro Ortoleva, 2015. "Cautious Expected Utility and the Certainty Effect," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 693-728, March.
    3. Faruk Gul & Wolfgang Pesendorfer, 2001. "Temptation and Self-Control," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(6), pages 1403-1435, November.
    4. Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-587, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jean Baccelli, 2018. "Risk attitudes in axiomatic decision theory: a conceptual perspective," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(1), pages 61-82, January.
    2. Gregorio Curello & Ludvig Sinander, 2019. "Single-crossing dominance: A preference lattice," Papers 1902.07260, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2025.
    3. Fabio Bellini & Fabio Maccheroni & Tiantian Mao & Ruodu Wang & Qinyu Wu, 2025. "Disappointment Aversion and Expectiles," Papers 2508.05541, arXiv.org.
    4. Ghirardato, Paolo & Pennesi, Daniele, 2020. "A general theory of subjective mixtures," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    5. André Lapied & Thomas Rongiconi, 2013. "Ambiguity as a Source of Temptation: Modeling Unstable Beliefs," Working Papers halshs-00797631, HAL.
    6. Ghirardato, Paolo & Marinacci, Massimo, 2002. "Ambiguity Made Precise: A Comparative Foundation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 251-289, February.
    7. Robert Nau, 2001. "De Finetti was Right: Probability Does Not Exist," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 89-124, December.
    8. Thibault Gajdos & Jean-Marc Tallon & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud, 2002. "Coping with imprecise information: a decision theoretic approach," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques v04056, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), revised May 2004.
    9. Strzalecki, Tomasz & Werner, Jan, 2011. "Efficient allocations under ambiguity," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 146(3), pages 1173-1194, May.
    10. Epper, Thomas & Fehr-Duda, Helga, 2017. "A Tale of Two Tails: On the Coexistence of Overweighting and Underweighting of Rare Extreme Events," Economics Working Paper Series 1705, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
    11. John Quiggin, 2022. "Production under uncertainty and choice under uncertainty in the emergence of generalized expected utility theory," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 92(3), pages 717-729, April.
    12. Grant, S. & Quiggin, J., 2001. "A Model-Free Definition of Increasing Uncertainty," Discussion Paper 2001-84, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    13. Alexander Zimper & Alexander Ludwig & Max Groneck, 2012. "A Life-Cycle Consumption Model with Ambiguous Survival Beliefs," 2012 Meeting Papers 693, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    14. Aouani, Zaier & Chateauneuf, Alain & Ventura, Caroline, 2021. "Propensity for hedging and ambiguity aversion," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    15. Martins-da-Rocha, V. Filipe, 2010. "Interim efficiency with MEU-preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(5), pages 1987-2017, September.
    16. Ganguli, Jayant & Heifetz, Aviad & Lee, Byung Soo, 2016. "Universal interactive preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 237-260.
    17. Wolff, Irenaeus & Folli, Dominik, 2024. "Why is belief–action consistency so low? The role of belief uncertainty," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    18. Evren, Özgür, 2019. "Recursive non-expected utility: Connecting ambiguity attitudes to risk preferences and the level of ambiguity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 285-307.
    19. Charles-Cadogan, G., 2016. "Expected utility theory and inner and outer measures of loss aversion," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 10-20.
    20. Nobuo Koida, 2018. "Anticipated stochastic choice," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 65(3), pages 545-574, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bon:boncrc:crctr224_2024_563. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CRC Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.crctr224.de .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.